Posted on 12/22/2014 3:53:30 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The campaign to draft Dr. Ben Carson into a presidential run is clearly bigger than some flash in the pan and worthy of serious consideration, particularly given his showings in multiple polls. (Of course, I’ve been of the opinion for some time that he really doesn’t need that much coaxing and may well be enjoying the idea of needing to be teased into the fight.) One group which is most directly involved in the effort is Run Ben Run, which has already raised more than $12M toward the effort. But where is that money now? For the most part, it’s already gone.
Mr. Giles, who is preparing to be campaign chairman, projected raising $100 million to fuel a Carson campaign through the first four primaries by tapping small donors. Already, the Run Ben Run effort, a “super PAC,” has raised $12.2 million.
But behind that impressive cash haul is the problem facing most small-donor fund-raising: The group spent most of its income on direct mail and similar activities to raise its funds, according to the Federal Election Commission.
Armstrong Williams, Mr. Carson’s business manager and closest adviser, whose nickname for his friend is “Seabiscuit,” complained that Run Ben Run exists “to benefit the people that run it, not the Ben who’s running.”
The super PAC’s greatest asset is its record of thousands of small donors excited by Mr. Carson. But a Carson campaign would have to pay to use that list.
Both of the arguments in play over the PAC money should be familiar to political observers. On the one hand, running any sort of broad effort to raise awareness is expensive. Television ads in large markets are obviously pricey, but direct mail isn’t cheap either, particularly if you are talking about a national campaign rather than a single district. Sometimes the best you can do is hope to raise enough cash to pay for the next round of mailings, and in the process somehow raise the name recognition of the candidate.
But at the same time, many PACs have been plagued with accusations of blowing donor funds on fat salaries for the founders while doing very little in terms of actual grassroots activism. This has included Tea Party groups as well as liberal activist groups. Donors always need to do their own homework and find out how well the funds are being managed.
But what if they raise all this money and do all the work and Carson decides not to run? Will the energy be diverted to another candidate, let’s say… Ted Cruz? Probably not.
I don’t think we would support [Texas Sen. Ted] Cruz because I don’t think he can win.
I don’t think we would support Jeb Bush or Mitt Romney, because they’re just too close to the center and it’s more of the same…
I like what Ted Cruz says about the issues, but I think he’s a bull in a china shop. He’s too polarizing. The media will absolutely fry him every time he opens his mouth—not that they won’t go after Carson—but Carson is not loud. He’s not forceful. Ted Cruz will go on for hours about a given subject jumping up and down—again, I like his positions—I just don’t think his methods can get him elected.
Personally, I think Carson is serious, but at the same time realistically cautious. If it looks like there’s any daylight available for him to seize the nomination, I have no doubt that he’ll get in there and give it his best shot. But if the prospects look hopeless, he strikes me as somebody who is grounded enough to just move on and not sink that much of his life into a lost cause. He’s got a lot of work to do in terms of getting his message discipline down and avoiding self-inflicted wounds, but his obvious credentials as a genuine outsider will buy him a lot of forgiveness for that from the base.
The retiree that now wants to become president of the United States.
Remind me of the last time we elected someone to that office with absolutely no government experience, will you?
Carson, Paul and Gowdy support amnesty. Some of his supporters assume he is as conservative as Clarence Thomas.
Carson has some Second Amendment problems.
“...Armstrong Williams, Mr. Carson’s business manager and closest adviser,... complained that Run Ben Run exists “to benefit the people that run it, not the Ben who’s running.”...”
*******************************************************************************************************
And that, my FReeper friends, is frequently the case with these groups run by political professionals (professional in the sense that that is where they make their living and not in the sense that they are any damned good).
It would be very interesting to see who put these folks up to this. Remember, the “split the vote” strategy is alive and well among the GOPe RINOs.
And zero foreign policy experience.
Grant might fit that criterion although he did have an extensive military background. AFAIK, he never was elected to a government office. Maybe Eisenhower too. Both men, as military leaders had plenty of executive experience.
The military is part of the government. I didn’t say “legislative.”
“Political professionals” are the lowest of the low.
I have no doubt that they will deliberately destroy their own employer so they can move on to the next candidate who pays better. In fact its likely that deals are made to destroy candidates for a higher payout.
I recall his PAC used Email to raise funds so the direct mail expense is non existent. The costs have most likely been salaries.
We used to get the Carson people guessing Washington, I liked that because it gave me the chance to use the Washington bio post that I put together, but alas, it seems that they don’t go with him anymore.
Noted. You, of course are right. Thanks for the correction.
“I recall his PAC used Email to raise funds so the direct mail expense is non existent. The costs have most likely been salaries.”
****************************************************************************************************
That’s probably correct. And any “direct mail expense” costs may have been spent on “affiliated” (e.g., wife, relative or friend’s business) direct mail operatives. These political professions feed one another.
George Washington probably had more government experience than any other president, with a few possible exceptions.
This whole Ben Carson for President thing is getting really old.
It looks like my early posting on him has reached pretty wide.
I will post it anyway just in case someone hasn’t seen it yet.
George Washington had vast political experience before he became President of the United States.
Fifteen years in Virginia House of Burgesses.
George Washington served in the Virginia House of Burgesses for fifteen years before the American Revolution. After a failed bid for a seat in December 1755, he won election in 1758 and represented Frederick County until 1761. That year he ran in Fairfax County, winning a seat which he would retain until 1775.
With its origin in the first meeting of the Virginia General Assembly at Jamestown in July 1619, the House of Burgesses was the first democratically-elected legislative body in the British American colonies.
“Three days later Washington joined the burgesses remaining in Williamsburg to sign a resolution calling for a meeting in August which would become the first Virginia Revolutionary convention. The membership of the five Revolutionary conventions was almost entirely made up of burgesses.”
Member of the First Continental Congress.
The first Continental Congress met in Carpenter’s Hall in Philadelphia, from September 5, to October 26, 1774. Virginia’s delegation presented the most eminent group of men in America. Colo. George Washington, Richard Henry Lee, Patrick Henry, Edmund Pendleton, Colo. Benjamin Harrison, Richard Bland, and at the head of them Peyton Randolph — who would immediately be elected president of the convention.
Member of the Second Continental congress.
Washington served as a Virginia delegate to the Second Continental Congress in Philadelphia in 1775. Facing a fight for independence with Britain, he was elected Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army.
Major General and Commander-in-Chief of the colonial forces against Great Britain.
Constitutional Convention 1787.
When the Constitutional Convention opened in Philadelphia in May 1787, Washington was elected convention president by a unanimous vote, just as he had been unanimously chosen to lead the Continental Army twelve years before.
Presidential election of 1789.
Washington was once again called upon to serve this country. During the presidential election of 1789, he received a vote from every elector to the Electoral College, the only president in American history to be elected by unanimous approval.”
And he truly thinks that Carson can? Nut job.
Karl Rove and Jeb say, “Hi 5!!!”
They want nothing more than for conservatives to split their vote in the primaries. Rove and Jeb would also like to see Huckabee, Santrorum, and a few other so-called conservatives run.
Carson has ZERO chance of winning. He will only help split conservative voters so that we can have another McCain/Mitt type lose in the general election.
Isn't that ALWAYS the case? Tea Party Patriots, TPNN and TeaParty.net are such scams as well
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.